CULTURAL PRODUCTION and TRANSMISSION of ETHNIC TOLERANCE and PREJUDICE: INTRODUCTION Hilary Pilkington and Anton Popov University of Warwick

CULTURAL PRODUCTION AND TRANSMISSION OF ETHNIC TOLERANCE AND PREJUDICE: INTRODUCTION Hilary Pilkington and Anton Popov University of Warwick

This special issue is a collection of selected intolerance. Here we provide a brief, critical papers presented to workshops held under the review of two models of multi-ethnic societies auspices of the RIME (Releasing Indigenous envisaged and implemented in the twentieth Multiculturalism through Education) project. century before outlining their common failings RIME is an EU funded project under the and presenting an alternative approach. European Initiative on Democracy and Human Rights programme and brings together NGO Socialist Models of Multi-ethnic Living and academic partners from Bosnia and We start with the discussion of socialist Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria, models because it is these particular ways of Ukraine, Russia, Georgia, Abkhazia, and the envisaging the parallel promotion of ‘national’ UK. The project had two core aims: to and ‘cultural’ difference and political unity facilitate cross-regional NGO networking and that have shaped the experience of the region sharing of experiences; and to stimulate discussed in this volume. Socialist attempts to dialogue between the NGO and academic create the conditions for harmonious multi- communities. This special issue collates a ethnic living have been rooted in the number of research-based papers presented to conviction that it is the (capitalist, imperial) project workshops in order to stimulate this state that is ‘guilty’ and that its destruction and dialogue. These papers focus on young replacement by a state structure with a people’s experience of ethnic conflict, post- professed supra-ethnic identity, alongside the conflict and frozen conflict situations, or of encouragement of ‘state-free’ cultural living in multiethnic societies in which the production articulating ethnic, linguistic and ethnic stereotypes and prejudices of majority ‘cultural’ identities, is able to ensure the groups often go unnoticed and unchallenged. i tolerance of ethnic and cultural difference. In this introductory article the editors This model foundered, we suggest, not because set these papers in the wider context of the of profound and ancient ‘ethnic hatreds’ but academic debate to which they seek to because the supraethnic ideology that sought to contribute. This introduction thus has three supersede ethnic particularisms was built on a aims: to reflect critically on current debates universalist philosophy which professed that about ‘multiculturalism’; to outline a cultural class locations and solidarities prevailed over approach to ‘multiculturalism’ that challenges all others. This proved to be untrue or, more the reification of particular ‘cultures’ by accurately, untrue for the particular historical focusing on the everyday practices of multi- and cultural conjuncture in which it was ethnic living; and to highlight (with examples enacted. from the individual papers in this volume) how The internal conflict between the this approach can help us understand the principles of social, economic and political cultural production and transmission of ethnic modernisation, on the one hand, and promotion tolerance and prejudice among young people. of ethnic diversity and ethno-cultural particularism, on the other, was especially Same State, Different Cultures? Models for visible in the Soviet model of multiculturalism, Multi-Ethnic Societies which might be defined as ethno-territorial Models for multi-ethnic living are premised on federalism. The Soviet project of social the recognition that societies are racially, modernisation was accompanied by the ethnically and culturally diverse. They all also manifestation, promotion and creation of share a commitment to balancing the need for reified cultural differences by the a sense of ‘collective belonging’ at state level institutionalisation of ethnicity through the whilst allowing ethnic and cultural differences implementation of the korenizatsiia to be articulated and respected throughout (indigenisation) projects in the 1920s (Slezkine society. They diverge from one another, 1996: 214-225; Tishkov 1997: 27-31) and subsequent official ‘affirmative-action’ arguably, in relation to both their ii understanding of the primary unit of that programmes targeting ‘titular nationalities’ diversity (racial, ethnic, religious, linguistic, (see Gitelman 1992; Martin 2001; Suny 1993). ‘cultural’) and in their identification of the key The political and administrative structures in site of social intervention for the eradication of the national autonomies were formed in a way

Volume 26, No. 1 Page 7

Anthropology of East Europe that reflected the ethnic composition of the Herzegovina of Muslim faith (as well as the region or territory. As a rule, the Muslim population of the Sandžak region of representatives of titular nationalities Serbia, see Obradović’s article in this volume). predominated among republic or regional Echoes of Soviet reification of ethnicity were officials. The new political classes in the evident, however, even in non-federated national autonomies were formed by recruiting socialist states, like Romania and Bulgaria, for new members of the Communist Party example in ethnic quotas for Party membership predominantly from the titular ethnic groups (Verdery 1996: 86). In Bulgaria, moreover, the (Suny 1993: 103). As Suny states, in the Soviet Soviet logic of institutionalised personal ethnic Union, ‘[titular] nationality had taken on a new identification was apparent in the compulsory importance as an indicator of membership in name-changing campaign to which ethnic the relevant social and cultural community’ Turks and other Muslim minorities were (121). subjected by the communist regime in the The ethnic self-identification of 1970s-80s (Poulton 1993: 130). Soviet citizens was institutionalised through The growth of ethnonationalism in the the organisation of government and post-Soviet space, which coincided with administration along ethno-territorial lines and profound transformations in all spheres of life, by classifying the population by nationality seems to provide evidence supporting Layton’s (Brubaker 1996: 30-31). In the final days of argument that the salience of ethnicity depends the Soviet Union, the world witnessed on its political usefulness. This, he suggests, ethnonationalism emerging from the legacy of increases in unstable conditions, when people Soviet ethno-federalism and the fear the current leadership cannot protect them institutionalised personal ethnic identifications and respond by returning to their local of Soviet citizens. In Brubaker’s words, ‘the networks (Layton 2006: 135). At the same Soviet institutions of territorial nationhood and time, in the former USSR these networks personal nationality comprised a ready-made became effective political and economic template for claims to sovereignty, when institutions existing as parallel, and sometimes political space expanded under Gorbachev’ rival, structures to the state partly because of (24). the successful implementation of the Soviet The Soviet nationalities policy and its model of multiculturalism (Suny 1993: 115). institutional operationalisation was used to a Thus, paradoxically, Soviet nationalities policy greater or lesser extent as a template in other liberated and modernised the ethnically diverse socialist countries. The similarities are most population of Russia whilst simultaneously evident in the cases of the former Yugoslavia promoting the emergence of bounded ethnic and, to a lesser degree, in Czechoslovakia; entities based on rather essentialist both theses states were constituted as ethno- understandings of ethnicity and culture which territorial federations and thus the principle of have been used subsequently to explain, if not ethnic/national difference was ‘constitutionally justify, inter-group or inter-community enshrined’ (Verdery 1996: 58). In these tensions. countries, therefore, socialism might be said to have naturalised and reinforced ethnic Western Models of Multi-ethnic Living differences although such differences had been Western, post-imperial attempts to address present as a political issue in Central and South ethnic/racial intolerance focused initially on Eastern Europe since the growth of exposing the ‘scientific’ underpinnings of nationalism in the region in the nineteenth racism as erroneous and introducing legislation century. In (former) Yugoslavia, for example, that protected individuals against racist acts. In the institutionalisation of ethno-territorial the last quarter of the twentieth century, federalism resulted in the redefinition of however, anti-racism was superseded in many religious identities as ethnic and national. Thus western countries by a more proactive notion the ethnic category ‘Muslim’ was created for of ‘multiculturalism’. Multiculturalism differs Serbo-Croat speaking Muslims in the from anti-racism in that it seeks not only to federative republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina and punish, and ultimately eradicate, racial, ethnic some other areas of Yugoslavia (Poulton 1993: and religious intolerance, but also to promote 39). After the disintegration of the Yugoslav the positive social and cultural impact of state this ethnic category has been transformed interaction and communication between into that of ‘Bosniak’ (Bošnjak); an ethnonyme diverse ‘cultural’ communities (defined, more that has clear reference to the state of Bosnia often than not as ‘ethnic minorities’). Thus and Herzegovina (which is itself a multiculturalism is rooted in both a recognition multinational federation) but is used generally of the embeddedness of human experience in only in relation to citizens of Bosnia and

Volume 26, No. 1 Page 8

Anthropology of East Europe distinct, culturally-structured worlds (in multicultural or consociational democracies) contrast, for example, to cosmopolitan that recognise collective cultural rights understandings) whilst recognising that every (Smooha 2005: 13). However, as Lentin culture is internally plural and that dialogue argues, critics of cultural relativism who between such ‘cultures’ is socially enriching advocate principles of universal individual (Parekh 2000 cited in Abbas 2005: 155). human rights as the best means of combating In the post-9/11 context, however, racism and ethnic intolerance are in danger of multiculturalism is increasingly interpreted as universalising some purer form of humaneness ‘part of the problem not the solution’ without questioning the basis of that universal (Kundnani 2004: 108) to racism and ethnic vision which is, in fact, a projection of the discrimination.iii In this understanding the White European norms in which it is founded ‘problem’ is not inequality or deprivation of (Lentin 2001: 101). ‘minority’ communities but self-imposed cultural barriers between communities that Beyond Multiculturalism? Models for Multi- hinder the full participation in British society ethnic Living in Post-socialist Europe of ethnic minorities and foster racism (ibid; Such a recognition of universalism as ‘nothing Abbas and Akhtar 2005: 134). This political other than a particular that has been shift draws directly on academic criticism of universalised’ (Bhambra 2006: 36) is central to the concept of multiculturalism; the Blair our theoretical starting point. Moreover, we government’s adoption of ‘community suggest, the experience of post-socialist cohesion’ as a new social priority, for Central, Eastern and South Eastern Europe example, picks up on a key criticism of over the last two decades has provided an multiculturalism, that is the claim that it important impulse for such theoretical equates cultural diversity with cultural reflection. The collapse of the Soviet Union relativism. This critique is summarised by and the ethnic conflicts and intense Ulrich Beck who argues that, ‘The strategy of ethnonationalist state-building projects that multiculturalism presupposes collective engulfed parts of the post-socialist world from notions of difference and takes its orientation 1989 initiated a new wave of state-building from more or less homogeneous groups projects in Europe driven by what Smooha conceived as either similar to or different, but calls ‘two conflicting organizing principles: in any case clearly demarcated, from one democracy for all and ethnonational another and as binding for individual ascendancy of the majority group’ (Smooha members…Well-meaning multiculturalists can 2005: 57). The flip side of these processes has easily ally themselves with cultural relativists, been a myriad of ‘minority nationalisms’ that thereby giving a free hand to despots who develop to counter the emergent ethnocratic invoke the right to difference…’ (Beck 2006: state. These processes have challenged the 67). notion of multiculturalism on both its political Beck goes on to argue that and its academic terrain. Politically, as Devic underpinning the multiculturalist vision is the argues, the problem with liberal reduction of individuals to mere multiculturalism’s assumption that ethnicized ‘epiphenomena of their cultures’ (ibid.) This is culture is the primary basis for political a concern shared by others who have accused organization of ethnic minorities is that it ‘may multiculturalism of failing to eliminate the inadvertently perpetuate the nationalist, i.e. implicit hierarchies of biologically rooted ethno-centred state building agenda’ (Devic racial doctrines in favour of cosmetically 2006: 258). Academically, what is often replacing the uncomfortable notion of ‘race’ caricatured as the ‘resurgence of nationalism’ with that of ‘culture’ or ‘identity’ (Abbas in the post-socialist space has encouraged 2005: 156; Lentin 2001: 98). This has led to western theorists to work with, rather than calls to replace ‘multiculturalism’ with revised reject, ‘nationalism’ and ‘ethnicism’. versions of earlier discourses of the Indicative here is Beck’s notion of ‘realistic empowerment of individuals - especially cosmopolitanism’ (2006: 57), which ‘should human rights discourses - that promote first not be understood or developed in opposition and foremost the education of individuals as a to universalism, relativism, nationalism and means of enabling ethnic minorities to ethnicism but as their summation or synthesis’. challenge the (discriminatory) state. This is These processes have also challenged indicative of the continued vibrancy of theorists from the post-socialist region to individual liberal (and republican) democracy intervene in the multiculturalism debate. as alternative ways of envisaging the Mikhail Epshtein seeks to rethink recognition of ethnic and cultural rights to ‘multiculturalism’ for post-socialist Russia those political formations (such as

Volume 26, No. 1 Page 9

Anthropology of East Europe drawing on ‘indigenous’ thinkers such as and its role in the (re)production of ethnic Bakhtin and taking into account both the tolerance and intolerance. different patterns of multi-ethnic living in Amin (2004) also seeks to avoid Eastern Europe as well as different visions of reification of the ‘other’ by seeing ‘self’ and what constitutes a good society. This leads him ‘other’ as mutually constituting identities. He to elaborate the notion of ‘transculture’ as an proposes the idea of ‘hospitality’, manifest in alternative to ‘multiculturalism’ (Epshtein the feeling of empathy between mutually 1995: 300). Like ‘multiculturalism, dependent identities of ‘host’ and ‘guest’ as a ‘transculture’ is driven by the impulse to unite way of understanding our everyday experience different cultures while recognising their of interactions with others in a globalizing multiplicity. Unlike ‘multiculturalism’ – which world and our need for the stranger as a Epshtein defines as rooted in the emphasis on boundary object (14-16). Whilst the experience the rights and dignity of individuals and as of socialist and post-socialist Europe confirms producing a multiplicity of separate and the resonance of the notion of hospitality distinct minority cultures which ‘may exist across Europe, its pertinence as a foundation side by side without taking the slightest for tolerance and empathy towards others is interest in one another’ (301) – ‘transculture’ also challenged by evidence that ‘hospitality’ is rooted in the Russian philosophical tradition is among the virtues to which xenophobes and that places a premium on wholeness but one nationalists appeal when seeking to assign which is consciously anti-totalitarian and ‘guests’ (meaning ethnic minorities, migrants achieved through a process of moving beyond and other ‘undesirable others’) their place in the limitations of identification with any one the ‘host country’. As Elbakidze (in this culture (298). In this – although by reasserting volume) indicates, the peaceful co-existence of the notion of ‘totality’ in contrast to Beck’s re- different ethnic groups in (post-)Soviet assertion of the ‘individual’ – he agrees with Georgia is often represented through narratives Beck that the prioritization within of hospitality which at the same time paper multiculturalism of cultural (ethnic, racial, over the reality of discrimination against religious) collective units condemns society to minorities and the inequality embedded in an eternal dialogue ‘across frontiers’ and host-guest relationships.iv falsely portrays ‘the intermingling of Attractive though Beck’s boundaries and cultures’ as the exception ‘cosmopolitan vision’, Bhambra’s call to be rather than the rule (Beck 2006: 67-8). ‘archivally cosmpolitan’ or Epshtein’s state of The next step in this process of re- ‘transculture’ may be, they inhabit an theorization is to challenge the very principles academic space largely untainted by the of multiculturalism as the recognition of everyday lives and practices of their imagined (respect for, celebration of) ‘others’ and their subjects. The RIME project environment – ‘difference’. Žižek’s criticism (1996) of based on the NGO-academic dialogue multiculturalism suggests that the Other which described at the outset of this article – in is respected and celebrated in multiculturalism contrast brought our participants repeatedly is the ‘folklorist Other’ which is perceived in back to the stark reality of understanding just accordance with the Eurocentric values of why, as Anthias (2006: 17) puts it, ‘do people tolerance, human rights and democracy, but with different languages, cultures and ways of any ‘real Other’ which is ‘patriarchal,’ life fail to live in harmony?’. In the second part ‘violent,’ and ‘fundamentalist’ is denounced. of this article we turn away from the Thus the idea of ‘respect’ for local/other theoretical question of the balance between cultures that is central to multiculturalism universalism and particularism that needs to be implies a Eurocentric patronising of the Other, struck in an increasingly globalized such that ‘the multiculturalist respect for the environment to a consideration of the everyday Other’s specificity is the very form of asserting mechanisms and practices that produce, one’s own superiority’ (44). This position reproduce and/or challenge ethnic makes Bhambra’s (2006: 39) call to move (in)tolerance. beyond simply hearing the voices of more ‘others’ to challenging the ‘initial paradigm in which there was an “us” and an “other”’ highly Between State and Individual: pertinent; it resonates strongly with the Understanding Ethnic (In)Tolerance as Part impulse in the region to challenge ‘the West’s of the ‘Circuit of Culture’ self-definition as the producer of universal Whilst accepting Bhambra’s (2006: 37) rights’ (33). At the same time, however, it begs argument that social theory has been all too the question of just how we go about ready to address ‘issues of cultural difference, understanding what Žižek calls the ‘real Other’ heterogeneity and otherness by assuming

Volume 26, No. 1 Page 10

Anthropology of East Europe difference to pre-exist the processes by which collective activity undertaken on the basis of it is produced’, we would not envisage this as a kinship, religion, ethnic and/or national problem that is inherent in taking a ‘cultural’ identities, which has been treated largely with approach. Rather, we suggest, it stems from suspicion, if not hostility, by political scientists employing a static notion of ‘culture’ that and philosophers writing on civil society.v In attempts to crudely de-ethnicise ‘ethnicity’ or dismissing ethnicity, religion or kinship-based de-racialize ‘race’ without challenging the forms of social solidarity as primordial, assumptions underpinning those boundaries. In however, apologists of the ‘hard’ definition of the second section of this article, therefore, we civil society fail to identify the real social, draw on a different way of thinking about economic and political dilemmas that people culture – the ‘circuit of culture’ (Hall 1997: 1) confront during post-socialist transformation - to understand ethnic (in)tolerance in Eastern and which they often seek to resolve through Europe. This, we suggest is - as elsewhere ethnic, cultural or national affiliation. around the world - produced, transmitted, Furthermore, the exclusive search for liberal reproduced and resisted through the and individualist values as indicators of ‘true’ interactions between a range of social and civil society leads universalists to ignore the cultural institutions, individual and collective potential that other forms of social solidarity cultural practices. have for challenging the state’s domination of In this section, therefore, we move the the ‘public sphere’. terrain of debate to the realm of everyday Anthropological research has cultural experiences and practices in the generated substantial evidence of collective former Soviet Union, Central and Eastern civic activities under Communist rule, which Europe. In so doing, we attempt to address might be interpreted, as forms of civil society directly rather than skirt the challenge voiced were a more inclusive approach to be applied. by Žižek (1996) that while it is wrong that Based on the study of official (and thus to a ruling elites exploit a popular desire for greater or lesser extent party-controlled) primordial identities, the expression of such associations (sports clubs, voluntary fire ‘longing’ must not be denied nor the brigades, youth associations, professional and substance, passion and ‘jouissance’ that fill amateur art associations, religious these collective identities. Thus the first part of organisations, etc.), politically independent this section argues against an understanding of organisations (independent trade unions and ethnic solidarities in the region as being political parties) and informal social groupings repressed and then ‘exploding’ as the state (such as family and interest groups), withdrew under the collapse of Communism. It Buchowski (1996: 84) argues that in socialist does so by tracing the forms and meanings of Poland, collective activity took both official ethnic association that have developed in post- and unofficial forms and created ‘the socialist societies and by asking how this can possibility of action and the promotion of help us understand both tolerance and private or group interests against the intolerance in the region. The second part of authorities’. Moreover, because of the political the section goes on to consider the role of the acceptance and, in some cases, promotion of West in the construction and reproduction of ethnic associations by the authorities, they notions of primordial ethnicity in the post- occupied a rather public place in society and socialist space and, in particular, the processes provide a striking example of how state by which these discourses – for example of socialism engendered its own kind of civil ‘Balkanism’ - are received, internalised and re- society. articulated by individuals. We would thus suggest that a relatively broad understanding of civil society Civil Society and Ethnic Association: be employed along the lines suggested by (Re)producing ‘Primordial’ Ethnicities Robert Layton (2006: 44) who defines it as ‘the social structures occupying the space There is perhaps no clearer example of the between the household and the state that dangers of universalising the particular than in enable people to co-ordinate their management the understanding of civil society (Hann 1996: of resources and activities’. Such a definition 18) as ‘a concrete and quantifiable thing’, allows us to extend the analysis of civil society existing in an institutionalised form. Such a to all varieties of social groupings, including ‘hard’ vision of civil society fails to recognise those that are based on ethnic identity. This is as its constituent parts different forms of social important to the argument we outline in this solidarity that do not conform to the article because it allows for the possibility that ‘universal’ values of tolerance, democracy and ethnically based forms of association in post- liberalism. This is particularly true of socialist Eastern Europe are neither a product

Volume 26, No. 1 Page 11

Anthropology of East Europe of the flaring up of ancient hatreds buried and objectives. As such groups compete for hidden by failed imperial (including socialist) economic and political resources with other subjugation of ethnic conflict nor purely groups in their regions they often (re-)produce instrumentally ‘whipped up’ among an xenophobic stereotypes and discriminatory unreflexive ‘mass’ by ‘ethnic entrepreneurs’ practices against ethnic minorities. Outlining (Tishkov 1997: 284). While both these such a notion of ethnic tolerance and understandings of ethnic association assume intolerance as – politically and economically the pre-existence of formed and ‘finished’ contingent - pragmatic choices of members of ethnic identities, we start rather from the groups, Hayden (2002: 160) differentiates position that ethnicity is best viewed as a between what he calls ‘negative tolerance’ social construct which can be used (non-interference) and a liberal, ‘positive’ strategically by actors for establishing and reading of tolerance (recognition and respect maintaining social networks, managing for others’ beliefs and practices). Different economic resources and pursuing political groups, he suggests, might live side by side for interests. From this vantage point, ‘primordial’ a long period of time both avoiding overt versions of ethnicity promoted by ethnic conflict and maintaining distinction and associations, including in post-socialist differences from each other. At the same time societies is a form of ‘strategic essentialism’ they may be involved in peaceful competition, meaning that it ‘aims to produce a particular which – if the stakes are suddenly lowered or kind of effect’ (Gould 2007: 145). Thus, as the possible gains from open conflict suddenly Todorova (2004: 181) notes, ‘The real increased - may quickly turn into violence question is not that memory and identity can (ibid). Schäuble’s ethnographic study of be manipulated (of course they can), but why former combatants in central rural Dalmatia does the person hear the message at a provides some empirical evidence of the fact particular moment, so that he or she can then that both traumatising experiences in the past say that he or she learned what he or she has and dismal economic prospects ‘pave the way always known, and moreover insist that this is for ethnic nationalism, and have proved to part of a collective memory and a collective lower the threshold for violence’ (Schäuble identity.’vi 2006: 10). In such intermingled communities Such a social constructivist while close personal interactions are possible, understanding of ethnicity has its own and often inevitable, groups themselves remain challenges; not least the fact that ethnic structurally opposed and unmixed. The identities are often understood and expressed Bosnian institution of komšiluk or by people precisely in primordial terms of neighbourhood to which Hayden refers in his blood relationship and cultural rootedness. study is one instance of such negative How and why this should be so is significantly tolerance (162). Another example might be the illuminated by the notion of the ‘circuit of situation in the Georgian capital Tbilisi during culture’, which can help identify both the the Soviet period described by Elbakidze (in processes and the institutions that facilitate this volume) when generally tolerant this. Layton (2006: 134) – evoking Levi- relationships between members of different Strauss’ notion of ‘bricolage’ – for example, groups coexisted alongside ethnic stereotypes suggests that such ‘folk primordialism’ may be which conveyed a functional hierarchy of explained by the fact that ethnicities are shaped ethnic groups constraining them within a through the ‘intellectual restructuring of particular professional/social niche in society. existing cultural themes’ which brings Such negative tolerance allows both familiarity, plausibility and naturalness to new close interactions and even intimacy at the constructions. Thus, the ‘social construction’ individual level and differentiation and of ethnic identities does not mean that they are opposition at the group level. Therefore the invented but rather that they are creatively ethnic boundaries in such communities are shaped and reshaped from existing ‘traditional’ both blurred and impenetrable. When forms of identity (those related to language, conditions change, giving way to religion, family and gender) often mediated, ethnonationalist ways of representing and sometimes sponsored, by the state (Beller- communities and identities in society, people Hann and Hann 2001: 32). are ready to accept their ethnic identities as ‘primordial loyalties’ (Appadurai 2003: 155) The role of ethnic associations is because they have been aware of ethnic particularly important here since in the late differences always. However, when these 1980s and 1990s such ethnic associations loyalties are articulated at the personalised became the most salient form of citizens’ self- level of neighbourhood or workplace organisation and mobilisation in pursuit of interactions, people are often surprised to their political, economic and cultural

Volume 26, No. 1 Page 12

Anthropology of East Europe discover ethnic Others amongst their or the rhetoric of ‘hosts’ and ‘guests’ in neighbours, co-workers and friends. Thus Georgia (Elbakidze). It follows from this that former Soviet citizens often convey their civil society also has a significant ethnic feelings about the growth of ethnonationalism component; if both citizens and the state see during the late Soviet period in terms of a ethnicity as the most ‘natural’ form of sudden discovery of the ethnic ‘Other’ which solidarity, and ethnic visions and divisions of they simply failed to notice when they lived the social world are institutionalised, ethnic together as ‘one Soviet people’. Appadurai association may become the most effective (2003) suggests this sense of ‘betrayal’ - way of defending ‘ordinary’ people’s rights. having known someone as your ‘brother’ but However, as David Anderson notes, while suddenly seeing them ‘uncovered’, ‘different’, ethnic associations seem to express a defence ‘other’ than that which you knew - as an of the ‘social rights’ of their constituency, explanatory factor for the particular brutality these rights ‘may be better understood as rights of ethnic conflicts in South Eastern Europe. within a citizenship regime’ (1996: 110). This seems to be apposite for ethnic conflict Thus the history of the intermingled both in the former Yugoslavia and the living of different ethnic groups in the post- Caucasus (including Abkhazia). Moreover, socialist space should not be mistaken for Appadurai’s ‘hypothesis of treachery’, if ‘multiculturalism’ in its western confirmed, demonstrates a direct connection understanding, i.e. with ‘positive tolerance’ between the collective identities created, (using Hayden’s terminology) at its core. transformed and reified by the state, and Indeed, as Gould (2007: 162) argues, in some individual and group actions leading to ethnic regions of the world, including the Caucasus, violence and brutality. the racialised concept of ethnicity, Despite such obvious connections incorporating an essentialist understanding of between primordialism and nationalism and culture, was imported with the process of the complicity of both in ethnic conflict and modernisation in the twentieth century. This is violence, ‘primordial’ understandings of not to suggest that ethnic groups, or people ethnicity remain widespread and positively (narody) did not exist in the Caucasus before evaluated in post-socialist societies. One the twentieth century,vii but that these possible explanation of this phenomenon is group/community boundaries were often offered by Russian ethnologist Sergei porous and allowed interaction between and Sokolovski who emphasises the way in which inclusion of individuals from other primordialist interpretations of ethnicity were communities as well as differentiation at the institutionalised within Soviet ethno-territorial group level. In the Caucasus as well as the federalism and embedded in the personal Balkans communities are often based on kin ethnic identification of citizens via both the structures and/or belonging to religious Soviet passport system and denominations (Gould 2007; Hayden 2002) affirmative/repressive actions of the state and thus allow the incorporation of outsiders against individuals and groups as into particular ‘ethnic’ community through representatives of ethnic collectives. marriage and/or religious conversion.viii Thus, Consequently, ‘having become part of our it might be argued, the notion of ethnic reality, institutionalised categorisations and cultures was not relevant to these regions classifications were subsequently rarely because communities living next to each other questioned and, practically unnoticed, they for generations shared many, or in some cases remain a sort of mechanism of orientation and all, ‘cultural traits’. Gould (2007: 162) states differentiation; a social topology of the world this even more strongly, arguing that the whose legitimacy is no longer doubted’ concept of ‘ethnicity’ (and indeed of ‘race’) (Sokolovski 2006: 17). From this perspective which ‘we learn to project onto the most ethnicity and citizenship are tightly bound violence-ridden parts of the non-Western together. The rights of citizens are determined world is specific and unique to the Western by their ethnicity or, to be precise, by the modernity’. It follows that western notions of status of their ethnic group in the multiculturalism that merely substitute ‘race’ country/region defined in primordial terms as with ‘culture’ without actually undermining the connection between people and territory. the essentialising nature of the former (Appiah Almost all the contributions to this special 2005: 136) as a universal cure from ethnic issue provide evidence of the transmission of intolerance may turn out to enhance rather than this primordial vision of ethnicity into the idea undermine an ethnicised and racialised vision of citizenship, whether it is manifested through of the social world. the Kosovo myth in Serbia (Obradović), the discourse of Apsuara in Abkhazia (Sabirova),

Volume 26, No. 1 Page 13

Anthropology of East Europe

Balkans’ thus: ‘The defamiliarizing of Positioning the West accounts of Balkan conflicts in the Western media – describing ethnic wars as unthinkable The construction and reproduction of notions elsewhere in Europe while supplying gory of primordial ethnicity in the post-socialist details of singularly “Balkan” butchery to an space cannot be explained without eager audience – contribute to the perception understanding the complicity of the West. of the peninsula’s ambiguous, “not-yet” or Indeed, one of the advantages of the ‘circuit of “never-quite,” Europeanness’ (Goldsworthy culture’ model outlined above is that it allows 2002: 29). Here too, however, the Balkans is not only a means of understanding the role of not unique; there are clear connections the West in the original ‘colonial between the ‘image of the Balkans’ and the representation’ of ‘the Balkans’ (Bjelić 2002: representation of the violence as regional 4) or ‘the Caucasus’ (Grant 2005: 47, characteristics of the Caucasus in the Russian Shatirishvili 2005: 2) but also the processes by cultural and political context. Following the which such discourses are re-mobilised for the Chechen war and other so-called ‘ethnic presentation of current conflicts, received by conflicts’, the peoples of the Caucasus are people in the region, and re-articulated as a often portrayed in Russian and world media as, defensive ‘anti-western’ discourse which is by nature, violent (Grant 2005: 39). In the itself a central trope of nationalist discourse in contemporary Russian Federation, the quasi- post-socialist societies. ethnic concepts of ‘Caucasians’ (kavkaztsy) or There is a growing and fascinating ‘those of Caucasian nationality’ (litsa literature on the question of ‘Balkanism’ kavkazskoi natsional’nosti) operate extensively (Todorova 1997; Goldsworthy 1998; Bjelić & within the securitisation discourse of migration Savić 2002) to which justice cannot be done in policy, creating the image of migrants from this article. We would note here only that this this region as both corrupt and culturally alien debate goes significantly beyond simply to the ‘native’, ethnically Russian population. exposing another form of Western In the context of this special issue, demonisation of the ‘Other’. ‘Balkanism’ is however, our interest lies less in the rather a form of knowledge production which representational level than in the processes by works both in a similar way to Orientalism which these discourses are received, (Said 1997) but also involves distinct internalised and re-articulated by individuals. representational mechanisms as well as This is particularly important for simultaneously presenting itself as a critical understanding young people’s vision of their study of discourse on the Balkans (Bjelić national or ethnic ‘self’ and ‘others’ described 2002: 4-5). An interesting comparison is the in articles in this issue by Obradović, emergent discussion of the how the Caucasus Elbakidze, Sabirova and Omel’chenko & has been ‘imagined’ within Russian imperial Goncharova. We are particularly concerned and post-imperial discourse. Conflict and here with the way in which the critical violence in the history of Russo-Caucasian manifestation of ‘Balkinism’ noted above – the relations have been romanticised in Russian very awareness of the ‘Balkanising’ mission of popular culture since the imperial period and, the West – shapes post-conflict identities. In as Grant (2005: 47) argues, for the Russian former Yugoslavia in particular, the audience the Caucasus has become ‘an demonising of the region, alongside the everyday idiom’ of a zone of violence where experience of particularly painful moments Russians are ‘ever the noble victim’. such as the NATO bombing of Serbia in 1999, The re-mobilisation of these have left a strong trope of ‘betrayal’ in young discourses for the presentation of current people’s minds. Illustrative here is the conflicts is also well documented. As understanding of the historical relationship Hammond (2005: 139) notes ‘The between Serbia and the West by a young understanding of Yugoslavia as a collection of Serbian intellectual interviewed by Volčič as fractious, malevolent entities was central to the one of profound treachery: ‘Europe… yes… wider discursive recovery of Victorian the West… has betrayed the Serbs… over and balkanism’. Central to this discourse are over again throughout history’ (Volčič 2005: claims to the presence of ‘ancient ethnic 155). What is really interesting about Volčič’s hatreds’ and an unusual ‘savagery’ in the study of the significance of the West as ‘the region (142), which have been exploited Other’ in shaping Serbian national identity widely in western media accounts of the among young people today, however, is what conflicts in former Yugoslavia. Goldsworthy it reveals about the complex workings of the connects this war reporting with historically ‘circuit of culture’. Receiving and reworking rooted discursive constructions of ‘the Balkinist discourse, the young intellectuals

Volume 26, No. 1 Page 14

Anthropology of East Europe interviewed by Volčič develop a counter- Epistemological, methodological and ethical critique of the West in which the West is considerations caricatured as spiritually empty but culturally, Before introducing those contributions, it is economically and politically imperialistic worth noting that the theoretical approach we (163). In some cases this critical perspective have outlined in this introductory chapter takes the form of appropriating this western brings with it a clear epistemological ‘othering’ and turning it back on the West standpoint and a series of methodological through what Volčič (167) describes as a consequences that are common to the articles rhetorical strategy of ‘self-exoticization’. The that follow. It envisages ethnic (in)tolerance as qualities ascribed to ‘the Balkans’ – barbarity, socially constructed and as profoundly irrationality, passion – are reappropriated and contextually dependent. This implies that its employed as a declaration of freedom and study needs to be conducted in its natural resistance against western oppression and, setting, within the cultural contexts (the literally, sold back to the West in the form of a family, school/college, friendship, or branded ‘Balkan art’. As Volčič (171) notes, ‘subcultural’ youth group, etc.), in which however, the paradox of this strategy is that, in tolerance and intolerance is produced and the very act of unmasking the hegemony of the reproduced. This does not imply that we see western social order and negotiating their something ‘pure,’ ‘untouched,’ or ‘authentic’ representations within it, respondents in the articulations of ethnic (in)tolerance that effectively strengthen that order by employing are captured through qualitative research, but commercial stereotypes of themselves whilst that in order to understand the production, reducing their claims to the ‘difference’ from transmission and resistance of ethnic the West they ascribe to themselves. (in)tolerance we need to recognise and ‘learn the language of’ its everyday cultural practice. Sites and Forms of the (Re)Production of We also need to be able to understand Ethnic (In)Tolerance: Young people in (in)tolerance as part of the whole subjectivities focus of the agents – in this case young people – who produce and reproduce it. The focus in this special issue on the reproduction of ethnic (in)tolerance among the For these reasons, the usefulness of younger generation reflects one of the original quantitative approaches (reported on, for foci of the RIME project. In this final section example, in the articles by Perasović and we explain the rationale for the focus on youth Elbakidze) which seek to measure national as well as some of the methodological and populations’ sense of ‘nearness’ or ‘distance’ ethical issues that it engenders. We also from ethnic ‘others’ is questionable due to its introduce briefly the particular sites and forms static, descriptive approach and inability to of the (re)production of ethnic (in)tolerance explain the origins or mechanisms of discussed in the contributions to the special reproducing ethnic (in)tolerance. Moreover, issue that follow. from an ethical perspective such research may indeed essentialise, solidify and authenticate It is important to establish that our ethnic stereotypes. This is not to suggest that decision to focus on youth was not rooted in a qualitative methods are without their failings. vision of youth as a symbol of the future or as Amongst RIME project participants, a ‘blank canvas’ from which to start over practitioners in particular voiced concern about following the ‘traumatogenic change’ of the the ‘non-representative’ nature of qualitative collapse of communism (Sztompka 2004: studies because of their small-scale, case-study 171). In this, therefore, we fundamentally approach as well as the potential for the abuse disagree with Sztompka’s vision of the of such findings by the state and other social younger generation as ‘saved from the institutions (such as the media) for the anxieties and uncertainties of oppositional production and manipulation of ethnic ‘fears’. combat, the elation of revolution and the early Such concern is natural, legitimate, and real; disappointments of transition’ and as such ‘the the ‘circuit of culture’ model discussed above carriers of a new culture inoculated against suggests that such research will, inevitably, be postcommunist trauma’ (Sztompka 2004: 193). received, re-presented and disseminated and We see young people, rather, as deeply become part of the cultural context in which embedded in these post-socialist contexts and new actors reproduce or resist ethnic in the articles that follow different aspects of (in)tolerance. that context and its implications for the production, transmission or resistance of ethnic intolerance are explored.

Volume 26, No. 1 Page 15

Anthropology of East Europe

A thematic introduction to the case studies social change and individual experience. Here The articles included in this special issue are again our starting point is quite different from extremely diverse in terms of the youth that of Sztompka, whose model for experiences they analyse. Nonetheless, their overcoming the trauma of post-socialist contribution to the overall aim of change assumes that institutions of understanding the (re)production of ethnic ‘socialization’ - the family, school, media, (in)tolerance might be envisaged in terms of political parties, and civil organisations - are in three key connective strands: structural and place, work effectively and have the trust of historical context; cultural sites or mechanisms (young) citizens. This understanding shares the of the (re)production of (in)tolerance; active limitations of all functionalist understandings engagement of young people. of youth culture and generational reproduction; this is compounded by the fact that, in post- The structural and historical context socialist societies, these institutions are of young people’s experience is considered by themselves only emergent. As noted above, as all authors contributing to this special issue, these institutions (political parties, churches, reflecting the awareness that young people educational institutions, etc.) compete for growing up in post-communist societies economic and political resources they often experience a ‘constant feeling of insecurity and (re-)produce xenophobic stereotypes. This existential risk’ (Tomanović & Ignjatović process is detailed in Elbakidze’s article in this 2006: 272). However, in the case studies volume, as she discusses the mobilisation of outlined by some authors – Sabirova, the Church and schools that attempt to define Elbakidze, Obradović - the underlying and assert the primacy of ‘the majority’ ‘trauma’ of ‘transition’ is overlaid by the Georgian ethnic group by proxy of Orthodoxy. trauma of war, ethnic conflict and/or Other articles consider the particular role of displacement. For these young people the key sites of cultural production and world is far removed from Sztompka’s (2004: transmission. In the contributions by Perasović 193) description of it as ‘relatively stable, and Obradović, for example, the importance of established, secure, and predictable’. In the the role of the media in escalating ‘panic’ but contributions by authors to this special issue also in silencing subordinate narratives of this experience is dramatically illustrated in the events or phenomena is discussed. Families are case of Abkhazian youth (Sabirova); the extent also a prime site for the reproduction of to which young people are exposed to nostalgias for the past, and this is discussed in nationalist ideologies and violence has become the articles by Obradović and Sabirova. Indeed even more evident since the renewal of inter- in these two cases the role of the family in group violence in the region during the recent interpreting experience takes on additional conflict between Georgia and Russia in August significance due to the post-conflict situations 2008. However, such insecurity is also in which external sources of information are identified as an explanatory factor in mistrusted or simply absent. producing intolerance among ‘ethnic majority’ youth in Russia (Omel’chenko & Goncharova) It has been argued frequently that where young people who find themselves youth in post-socialist societies are civically without any real place or investment in the passive (Wallace 2003: 15). In the case studies new system may become resentful of those presented here, however, authors have with greater opportunity or of those ‘incomers’ approached young people not only as passive who can be easily identified as ‘responsible’ recipients of the ‘parent culture’ (Clarke et al for thwarted opportunities. Generational 1976: 15), but have considered a range of experience is far from homogeneous cultural spaces in which young people are (Pilkington 2006) and as is shown, for active and which are jealously guarded by example, in the article in this volume by them not only from incursions by the state but Perasović, whilst, in some cases, young people to some extent also from an institutionally- are able and ready to take up the new defined ‘civil society’ (Omel’chenko & opportunities produced by rapid social change, Pilkington 2006: 547). The political meaning other young people may pick up, exaggerate, of such cultural engagement may not be writ innovate, rebel and carry forward either large, but that does not make it insignificant. ‘regressive’ or new revolutionary responses to Apostolov’s discussion in this volume of the ‘trauma’ into the future. meanings of young people’s dancing and listening to chalga music in contemporary Central to understanding the Bulgaria raises many of these issues. Whilst responses of young people to structural for cultural critics, the phenomenon may be constraint is the role of social and cultural read as evidence of little more than the institutions, which mediate between macro commercialization and vulgarization of the

Volume 26, No. 1 Page 16

Anthropology of East Europe youth scene in Bulgaria, it is impossible to the implicit universalisation within ignore the deeper significance of the collective multiculturalism of a rather particular appreciation of a music and dance culture that European vision of the division and self-consciously draws on a fusion of a range relationship between ‘self’ and ‘other’. Indeed, of indigenous ethnic music. Other youth we suggest that this multicultural vision not cultural formations such as (sections of) punk only positions certain Eastern and South culture articulate more directly their Eastern European ‘others’ as displaying engagement with ‘the struggle against ‘dangerous’ primordial ethnic belonging but prejudice’ (Aksyutina 2005: 12) and, as is through its conscious promotion (not least as a documented in this volume in Perasović’s key criterion for eligibility for membership of article, find themselves subject to violence as a the European Union) may in fact engender consequence. Omel’chenko & Goncharova, such primordial ties as a politics of resistance. moreover, find evidence that even the In seeking an alternative way of understanding perpetrators of ethnically motivated violence – the complex processes of ethnic co-existence such as skinhead groups – are diverse and and conflict, however, we do not throw out the fractured groupings incorporating both White ‘cultural’ baby with the ‘multiculturalism’ power and anti-racist elements (Petrova 2006: bathwater. We reject only a static 189). understanding of culture that is used as a Of course we should not be naïve superficially de-racialized or de-ethnicised about the political potential of such cultural category or metaphor. The experience of the activism and we would not go as far as Feixa region considered in this special issue, we & Nilan in declaring that ‘youth cultures have suggest, shows that ethnic difference is neither the potential to lead the way in thinking about stable, fixed nor subject to repression or global conflicts and strategies for resolving mobilisation from above. Rather it is a lived them’ (Feixa & Nilan 2006: 211). As Les relationship, which at the individual level is Back (1996) argues, while racially and embedded in a multitude of everyday cultural ethnically mixed youth communities, and the practices and at the societal level expresses hybrid cultural forms and practices they itself along a continuum of ethnic co-existence develop may create cultural spaces in which through to ethnic conflict and violence. These racism is banished temporarily, they remain practices, we suggest, have to be located in subject to hegemonic racist discourse which their specific structural and historical contexts. structures the world outside. Thus Sztompka In this we concur with Ana Devic (2006: 270) (2004: 193) is wrong to see the younger that it is essential not to ‘deny or neglect the generation’s culture as ‘no longer ambivalent, evidence that before the outbreaks of violence internally split’ and the nature of this frission there existed some long-standing forms of and ambivalence is explored in the articles by multiculture, which could be defined as Obradović, Omel’chenko & Goncharova, unstructured multiculturalism, rooted in Perasović and Apostolov as they consider the everyday life and indicating the existence of role of either specific forms of popular culture alternatives to liberal multiculturalism’. Such or of everyday cultural practices and speech in an ‘indigenous multiculturalism’, we suggest, articulating and embedding (often holds the potential for the peaceful coexistence unconsciously) notions of ethnic ‘others’. of different groups, or even their functional Thus, whilst retaining a strong dose of realism, integration, whilst promoting non-violent we suggest that it is important that these competition for economic and political cultural responses of young people are not resources as well as containing the possibility dismissed as ‘passive’, ‘consumer’ behaviour of violent ethnic conflict. At the same time the but understood as part and parcel of young ‘peculiarity’ of experiences of ethnic co- people’s response to the cultural ‘trauma’ existence in the region should not be reified. endured as well as their contribution to the We have tried to indicate in this introductory reconstitution of the cultural tissue of society. article a range of cultural mechanisms (media representation, popular culture and subcultural

affiliation, church, school, family, memory, Conclusion imagination, intergenerational ties), which This introductory article has sought to connect these individual cultural practices to illustrate how the experience of multi-ethnic macro social change. In the individual co-existence in socialist and post-socialist contributions that follow the workings of these Europe can inform debates about cultural mechanisms are explored in their multiculturalism (and what comes after it). specific regional and historical contexts. This experience, we have suggested, confirms trends in recent theorising, which are critical of

Volume 26, No. 1 Page 17

Anthropology of East Europe

Notes 5 For Seligman (1995: 212-213), the liberal- 1 The editors were the RIME project Principal individualist or ‘universalist’ vision of civil society, which emphasises the legal equality of Investigator and the project Manager and thus individuals and is ensured by ‘a procedurally write from a position of reflecting on the just or fair process of democratic decision- results of the project as a whole. However, it is making in the public sphere’, is categorically important that the volume should not be read opposed to the forms of social solidarity as representing the collective conclusions of underpinned by relationships of kinship and RIME project participants but as the individual ethnicity, which he sees as primordial and views of authors shaped not only by their irrational. Gellner (1995: 33) also insists on varying academic and practitioner excluding from his definition of civil society backgrounds but also by their relationship to ‘traditional’ forms of social organisation (e.g. their research subject. 2 kinship, religion), which maintain social As part of the Soviet ethno-territorialization cohesion and solidarity by ‘a heavy ritual of national identities, the category ‘nation’ underscoring of social roles and obligations’. (natsiia) became defined in ethno-cultural 6 However, we would not concur with rather than citizenship terms. This Todorova’s claim (2004: 185) that culture and primordialist understanding of a nation as an identity are a wholly ‘individual endeavour’. ethnic collective based on commonality of 7 language, territory, economic life and Group divisions or communities in Hayden’s ‘mentality’ was affirmed in Stalin’s early sense of the term have existed in the region for writing on the ‘nationality question’ (Tishkov centuries, although it might be argued that the 1997: 29). It was elaborated further via Soviet meaning of such divisions - being Armenian, ‘ethnos theory’, which envisaged the nation as for example - has been continuously redefined the final stage of the evolution of ethnic (Gadjiev, Kohl and Magomedov 2007: 136). communities from relatively ‘primitive’ 8 In Abkhazia some families still remember (tribes) to more complex formations how their Sadz, Megrel or Turk ancestors (narodnosti). The Soviet category ‘nationality’ became Abkhaz (Kuznetsova and Kuznetsov is a derivative of this primordialist definition 2006) and there is ethnographic evidence of of nation and continues to be used in post- similar family histories among other ethnic Soviet Russia to indicate ethnic affiliation groups in the region (see for example rather than citizenship. In this volume we, and Tabukashvili 2004). other authors, use this category when ethnicity-related terminology is translated from the original (e.g. ‘nationalities’, ‘nationality References policy’, etc.). Abbas, T. (2005) Recent developments to 3 This shift in fact pre-dates the event of British Multicultural Theory. Policy ‘9/11’; civil unrest during the late summer of and Practice: The case of British 2001 in a number of post-industrial northern Muslims’, Citizenship Studies, 9(2), cities of England had already led to a retreat pp. 153-66. from the celebration of multicultural diversity Abbas, T. & Akhtar, P. (2005) The new and the re-emergence in government lexicon of sociology of British ethnic and ‘assimilationist language’ reminiscent of the cultural relations: The experience of sixties (Back, Keith, Khan, Shukra & Solomos British South Asian Muslims in the 2002). post-September 11 Climate, in: H. 4 As this special issue was going to press, a Henke (Ed.) Crossing Over: war in South Ossetia erupted (August 2008), Comparing Recent Migration in effectively ‘defrosting’ post-Soviet ethnic Europe and the United States, pp. conflicts in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The 130-146 (CA: Lexington). peaceful coexistence of different ethnic groups Aksyutina, O. (2005) A global network of in Georgia, with or without South Ossetia and friends: DIY punk culture in Russia Abkhazia, has been jeopardised once more as and its CIS neighbours, Kultura, 2, both Georgia and South Ossetia accuse each pp. 10-15. other of ethnic cleansing during the military Amin, A. (2004) Multi-Ethnicity and the Idea phase of the conflict. Once again the territory of Europe, Theory, Culture and of the nation-state (even where that state is Society, 21(2): 1-24. internationally unrecognised) has been Anderson, D. (1996) Bringing Civil Society to depicted as ethnic territory and ‘home’ for a an Uncivilised Place: Citizenship titular nationality, confining non-titular groups Regimes in Russia’s Arctic Frontier, to ‘alien others’. in C. Hann and E. Dunn (Eds) Civil

Volume 26, No. 1 Page 18

Anthropology of East Europe

Society: Challenging Western Buchowski, M. (1996) The Shifting Meanings Models, pp. 99-120 (London: of Civil and Civic Society in Poland, Routledge). in C. Hann and E. Dunn (Eds) Civil Anthias, F. (2006) Belongings in a Globalising Society: Challenging Western and Unequal World: Rethinking Models, pp. 79-99 (London: Translocations, in: N. Yuval-Davis, Routledge). K. Kannabiran and U. Vieten (Eds), Clarke, J., Hall, S., Jefferson, T. & Roberts, B. The Situated Politics of Belonging, (1976) Subcultures, cultures and pp. 17-31 (London: Sage class: A theoretical overview, in: Publications). Hall, S. & Jefferson T. (Eds) (1976) Appadurai, A. (2003) Modernity at Large: Resistance through Rituals. Youth Cultural Dimensions of Globalization Subcultures in Post-War Britain, (Minneapolis and London: University pp. 9-74 (London: Unwin Hyman of Minnesota Press). Ltd) [Reprinted by Routledge, 1993]. Appiah, K. A. (2005) The Ethics of Identity Devic, A. (2006) Transnationalization of civil (Princeton: Princeton University society in Kosovo: International and Press). local limits of peace and multiculturalism, Ethnopolitics, 5(3), Back, L. (1996) New Ethnicities and Urban pp. 257-273. Culture: Racisms and Multiculture in Young Lives (London: UCL Press). Epshtein, M. (1995) After the future: The paradoxes of postmodernism and Back, L., Keith, M., Khan, A., Shukra, K & contemporary Russian culture, Solomos, J. (2002) The Return of Amherst, Mass: University of Assimilationism: Race, Massachusetts Press (ebook accessed Multiculturalism and New Labour, via Netlibrary, 27.03.06 at Sociological Research Online, 7(2) http://www.netlibrary.com. accessed online at Feixa, C. & Nilan, P. (2006) Postscript, in: P. www.socresonline.org.uk Nilan & C. Feixa (Eds) Global Beck, U. (2006) The Cosmopolitan Vision, Youth? Hybrid Identities, Plural (Cambridge: Polity Press). Worlds, pp. 205-212 (London and Beller-Hann, I. and Hann, C. (2001) Turkish New York: Routledge). Region: State, Market and Social Gadjiev, M., Kohl, P. L. and Magomedov, R. Identities on the East Black Sea Coast G. (2007) Mythologizing the Remote (Oxford: James Currey). Past for Political Purposes in the Bhambra, G. K. (2006) Culture, Identity and North Caucasus, in: B. Grant and L. Rights: Challenging Contemporary YalçınHeckmann (Eds), Caucasus Discourses of Belonging, in: N. Paradigms: Anthropologies, Histories Yuval-Davis, K. Kannabiran and U. and the Making of a World Area, pp. Vieten (Eds), The Situated Politics of 119-142 (Münster: Lit Verlag). Belonging, pp. 32-41 (London: Sage Gellner, E. (1994) Conditions of Liberty: Civil Publications). Society and Its Rivals (London: Bjelić, D. (2002) ‘Introduction: Blowing up Hamish Hamilton). the ‘Bridge’, in: D. Bjelić & O. Savić Gellner, E. (1995) The Importance of Being (Eds), Balkan as Metaphor. Between Modular, in J.A. Hall (Ed.) Civil Globalization and Fragmentation, Society: Theory, History, pp. 1-22 (Cambridge Comparison, pp. 31-55 (Cambridge: Massachusetts/London: The MIT Polity Press). Press). Gitelman, Z. (1992) Development and Bjelić, D. & Savić, O. (Eds) (2002) Balkan as Ethnicity in the Soviet Union, in A. Metaphor. Between Globalization and Motyl (Ed.) The Post-Soviet Nations: Fragmentation (Cambridge Perspectives on the Demise of the Massachusetts/London: The MIT USSR, pp. 220-239 (New York: Press). Columbia University Press). Brubaker, R. (1996) Nationalism Reframed: Goldsworthy, V. (1998) Inventing Ruritania: Nationhood and the National The Imperialism of the Imagination Question in the New Europe (New Haven: Yale University Press). (Cambridge: Cambridge University Goldsworthy, V. (2002) Invention and Press). in(ter)vention: the rhetoric of

Volume 26, No. 1 Page 19

Anthropology of East Europe

Balkanization, in: D. Bjelić & O. Village of Lidzava’, Bulletin: Savić (Eds), Balkan as Metaphor. Anthropology, Minorities, Between Globalization and Multiculturalism (New Series), 1(1- Fragmentation, pp. 25-38 (Cambridge 3): 67-88. Massachusetts/London: The MIT Layton, R. (2006) Order and Anarchy: Civil Press). Society, Social Disorder and War Gould, R. (2007) ‘Language Dreamers: Race (Cambridge: Cambridge University and the Politics of Etymology in the Press). Caucasus’, in: B. Grant and L. Lentin, A. (2004) The problem of culture and YalçınHeckmann (Eds), Caucasus human rights in the response to Paradigms: Anthropologies, Histories racism, in: G.Titley (Ed.) Resituating and the Making of a World Area, pp. Culture, pp. 95-104 (Strasbourg: 143-166 (Münster: Lit Verlag). Council of Europe). Grant, B. (2005) The Good Russian Prisoner: Mandel, R. (2002) Seeding Civil Society, in Naturalizing Violence in the C.M. Hann (Ed.) Postsocialism: Caucasus Mountains, Cultural Ideals, Ideologies and Practices in Anthropology, 20(1), pp. 39-67. Eurasia, pp. 279-296 (London: Hall, J. (1995) In Search of Civil Society, in: Routledge). J.A. Hall (Ed.) Civil Society: Theory, Martin, T. (2001) The Affirmative Action History, Comparison, pp. 1-31 Empire: nations and Nationalism in (Cambridge: Polity Press). the Soviet Union, 1923-1939 (Ithaca, S. Hall & T. Jefferson (Eds) Resistance NY: Cornell University Press). through Rituals. 1976/1993) Omel’chenko, E. & Pilkington, H. (2006) Hall, S. (Ed.) (1997) Representation: Cultural Youth Activism in Russia, in: L.R. Representations and Signifying Sherrod, R. Kassimir, & C. Flanagan Practices (London: Sage/Open (Eds), Youth Activism: An University). International Encyclopedia, Volume Hammond, A. (2005) ‘The danger zone of 2, pp. 542-50 (Westport, CT: Europe’. Balkanism between the Cold Greenwood Publishing Company). War and 9/11, European Journal of Parekh, B. (2000) Rethinking Cultural Studies, 8(2), pp. 135-54. Multiculturalism: Cultural Diversity Hann, C. (1996) Introduction: Political Society and Political Theory (London: and Civil Anthropology, in C. Hann Palgrave). and E. Dunn (Eds) Civil Society: Petrova, Y. (2006) Multi-level identifications Challenging Western Models, pp. 1- among contemporary skinheads in 26 (London: Routledge). France, in: P. Nilan & C. Feixa (Eds), Hann, C. (2006) ‘Not the Horse We Wanted!’ Global Youth? Hybrid Identities, Postsocialism, Neoliberalism, and Plural Worlds, pp. 186-204 (London Eurasia (Münster: LIT Publishers). and New York: Routledge). Hayden, R. (2002) Intolerant Sovereignties Pilkington, H. (2006) ‘Chem bol’she eto and ‘Multi-multi’ Protectorates: obsuzhdaetsia, tem bol’she k etomu Competition over Religious Sites and vlechet’: razmyshleniia o (In)tolerance in the Balkans, in C.M. diskursivnom porozhdenii Hann (Ed.) Postsocialism: Ideals, pokolencheskogo opyta’, Ideologies and Practices in Eurasia, Antropologicheskii forum, 5: 379- pp. 159-179 (London: Routledge). 407. Kalb, D. (2002) Afterword: Globalism and Pilkington, H., Omel’chenko, E., Flynn, M., Postsocialist Prospects, in C.M. Hann Bliudina, U. & Starkova, E. (2002) (Ed.) Postsocialism: Ideals, Ideologies Looking West? Cultural Globalization and Practices in Eurasia, pp. 317-334 and Russian Youth Cultures (London: Routledge). (University Park Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press). Kundnani, A. (2004) The rise and fall of British multiculturalism, in: G.Titley Poulton, H. (1993) Balkans: Minorities and (Ed.) Resituating Culture, pp. 105-12 States in Conflict (London: Minority (Strasbourg: Council of Europe). Rights Publications). Kuznetsova, R. and Kuznetsov I. (2006) ‘War, Sabanadze, N. (2005) Georgia’s ethnic Peace and Community in the Abkhaz democracy: Source of instability, in:

Volume 26, No. 1 Page 20

Anthropology of East Europe

S.Smooha & P.Järve (Eds), The Fate Suny, R. (1993) The Revenge of the Past: of Ethnic Democracy in Post- Nationalism, Revolution, and the communist Europe, pp. 115-136 Collapse of the Soviet Union (Budapest: LGI Books). (Stanford: Stanford University Press). Said, E. (1997) Orientalism (New York: Sztompka, P. (2004) The trauma of social Vintage Books). change: A case of postcommunist Schäuble, M. (2006) ‘Imagined suicide’: self- societies, in: J. Alexander, sacrifice and the making of heroes in R.Eyerman, B. Giesen, N. Smelser & post-war Croatia, Anthropology P. Sztompka Cultural Trauma and Matters Journal, 8(1), pp. 1-14. Collective Identity, pp. 155-95 (Berkeley: University of California Seligman, A. (1995) Animadversions upon Press). Civil Society and Civic Virtue in Last Decade of the Twentieth Century, in Tabukashvili, M. (2004) Polietnicheskaia J.A. Hall (Ed.) Civil Society: Theory, Gruziia: XX vek. Pamiat’ zhenshchin History, Comparison, pp. 200-222 (Tbilisi: Open Society – Georgia (Cambridge : Polity Press). Foundation). Shatirishvili, Z. (2005) Kavkazskaia Tishkov, V. (1997) Ethnicity, Nationalism and identichnost’, kavkazskie narrativy i Conflict in and after the Soviet mul’tikul’turnii gibridizm Union: The Mind Aflame (London: tif(tbi)lisskoi kul’tury (Unpublished Sage Publications). paper presented at the RIME Todorova, M. (1997) Imagining the Balkans workshop in Kabardinka/Russia, May (Oxford: Oxford University Press). 2005). Todorova, M. (2004) What is or is there a Slezkine, Y. (1996) The USSR as a Communal Balkan culture, and do or should the Apartment, or How a Socialist State Balkans have a regional identity?, Promoted Ethnic Particularism, in: G. Journal of Southeast European and Eley & R. Suny (Eds) Becoming Black Sea Studies, 4(1): 175-185. National. A Reader, pp. 202-238 Tomanović, S. & Ignjatović, S. (2006) The (Oxford: Oxford University Press). transition of young people in a Smooha, S. (2005) The model of ethnic transitional society: The case of democracy, in: S. Smooha and P. Serbia, Journal of Youth Studies, Järve (Eds), The Fate of Ethnic 9(3), pp. 269-85. Democracy in Post-communist Verdery, K. (1993) Ethnic Relations, Europe, pp. 5-60 (Budapest: LGI Economies of Shortage, and the Books). Transition in Eastern Europe, in C. Smooha, S. & Järve, P. (Eds) (2005) The Fate Hann (Ed.) Socialism: Ideals, of Ethnic Democracy in Post- Ideologies, and Local Practice, pp. communist Europe (Budapest: LGI 172-186 (London: Routledge). Books). Verdery, K. (1996) What Was Socialism and Sokolovski, S. (2006) Sovremennie teorii What Comes Next? (Princeton: etnichnosti i ikh vospriiatie v Rossii, Princeton University Press). Bulletin. Anthropology, Minorities, Volčič, Z. (2005) The notion of ‘the West’ in Multiculturalism. New Series, 1(7), the Serbian national imaginary, No. 1-3, pp. 11-19. European Journal of Cultural Studies, Sokolovski, S. (not dated) Occasional Paper 8(2), pp. 155-75. No 272. Structure of Russian Political Wallace, C. (2003) Young people in post- Discourse on Nationality Problems: communist countries: Vanguard of Anthropological Perspectives, change or lost generation?, in: T. available online at: Horowitz, B. Kotik-Friedgut & S. http://wwics.si.edu/topics/pubs/ACF2 Hoffman (Eds), From Pacesetters to 8A.pdf Dropouts: Post-Soviet Youth in Šuber, D. (2006) Myth, collective trauma and Comparative Perspective, pp. 3-26 war in Serbia: a cultural- (Lanham, New York, Oxford: hermeneutical appraisal, University Press of America). Anthropology Matters Journal, 8(1), Žižek, S. (1997) Multiculturalism, Or, the pp. 1-9. Cultural Logic of Multinational Capitalism, pp. 28-51.

Volume 26, No. 1 Page 21